alex falbo Posted 4 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 4 April , 2011 Chris, the problem with my safety is that despite the proper reassembly, including the aligning of the of internal catch to the thread, I cannot get the spring to provide sufficient pressure. Upon completion of assembly, the thumb latch to wobbles not firmly locking into safe/fire and functioning improperly. I'm at a loss because the first time I performed disassembly and reassembly I got it correct. Most frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete1052 Posted 4 April , 2011 Share Posted 4 April , 2011 Alex, if it turns out that you need a stronger spring Gun Parts Corporation is the place to find it. Edit: Here's a link to the same website with an exploded parts drawing for the SMLE -- I mean Pattern 14 -- parts drawing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 4 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 4 April , 2011 I might just upload a small video showing my assembly to see if I'm threading the internal catch at the right point. As it appears, it seems as if the spring is not applying enough pressure to the locking bolt (thumb piece) despite having the safety screw securely fastened. It just seems so strange that it was working perfectly only 48 hours ago. I shall keep tinkering with the threading to make sure I've got it at the right point. Thanks Pete for the link, BRILLIANT! I shall be needing that in any event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 4 April , 2011 Share Posted 4 April , 2011 Alex, if it turns out that you need a stronger spring Gun Parts Corporation is the place to find it. Edit: Here's a link to the same website with an exploded parts drawing for the SMLE -- parts drawing. That's a bit mean Pete... the link goes to the Pattern 14 page! THIS IS THE SMLEone! It could be that your spring - after the best part of 100 years is weak, or that in disassembling it you bent (atually probably straightened) it slightly. You could try bending it very gently so it exerts more pressure. They are easy to get and cheap. Later on during WWII the springs fitted at Lithgow and Ishapore we just flat oval pieces of spring steel. Chris Gunparts is good - Springfield Sporters are usually cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete1052 Posted 4 April , 2011 Share Posted 4 April , 2011 That's a bit mean Pete... the link goes to the Pattern 14 page! Whoops! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 4 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 4 April , 2011 ^^^lol not a problem I've finally got time to work with it closely since the creation of the initial problem. Tinkering with it more has made me suspect that its the spring as I can see that it clearly is not applying enough pressure on the washer enabling the locking piece to grip the fire/safe positions sufficiently. I can't imagine that I bent the spring anymore than it was configured as few days ago. Especially considering how firm it is. I'm going to try and bend it inward a little Chris and see what that produces. (work continues) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 4 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 4 April , 2011 Blimey! It worked. The spring must have stretched out after having dissembled it a few times. Ah well, live and learn. Its applying pressure now and the issue it solved. Thanks to all for advice. I must say its quite a good feeling to get that sorted. That coupled with the incoming Mk. II chargers this week makes me a very happy chap. Now its back to looking for a gunsmith to have a shufti and give me the OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 4 April , 2011 Share Posted 4 April , 2011 I've sorted the setting on the PC so can now post the photo. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 4 April , 2011 Share Posted 4 April , 2011 I've sorted the setting on the PC so can now post the photo. John Thank you. New one on me. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 9 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 9 April , 2011 ll lads, Got the Mk.II chargers. Had a question regarding the letters stamped on them. I've got ones marked with P and GC and K. The Roman numeral II is also stamped on them all. I'm assuming thats the Mark No. As for the SMLE, the gunsmith said the bolt head is short measuring .631 inches. It could be a replacement part as intense wear doesn't appear to be evident. Apparently its a fraction of an inch short. The bolt head at its tightest doesn't align with the main locking lug on the bolt. This means that the .303 head space gauge he used didn't stop the bolt from closing. This could possibly result in the splitting of shell cases upon firing and tearing or jamming the case in the breach upon ejection due to the bolt head failing to completely seal with the breech's shoulder. My question is, can pals on the forum tell me what there SMLE bolt heads measure to? And more importantly where can I get a suitable replacement if this indeed a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 9 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 9 April , 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete1052 Posted 9 April , 2011 Share Posted 9 April , 2011 The No. 4 Enfield used to have different sized bolt heads for solving headspace problems. I don't know whether there was a similar way of doing things for the SMLE. You shouldn't panic about this just yet, but if the problem persists I'd advise you to drink heavily, hang out with loose women, and sleep in until about 11 o'clock every morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 9 April , 2011 Share Posted 9 April , 2011 The No. 4 Enfield used to have different sized bolt heads for solving headspace problems. I don't know whether there was a similar way of doing things for the SMLE. You shouldn't panic about this just yet, but if the problem persists I'd advise you to drink heavily, hang out with loose women, and sleep in until about 11 o'clock every morning. While Pete's advice works for me.... No the SMLE does not have sized bolt-heads this was an innovation introduced with the No4 rifle but even there significant variation exists. I am unwilling to offer advice in a public forum that may be construed as "technical" and be related to safety (I am not a qualified gunsmith) this was the reason I suggested that you ensure the gunsmith you consulted was familiar with Enfields. Questions you might consider asking: was the Gauge he used a SAAMI Gauge or a UK mil spec. Gauge? Was he using a GO-NOGO Gauge or a Field GAUGE? What is the relevance of the bolt head in the fully screwed down position when this "overclocks" as a bolt with the head in this position cannot be inserted into the rifle? SMLE bolt heads vary considerably in dimensions, if you do indeed have excessive headspace (possible) is will be a question of using a micrometer on bolt heads to find one sufficiently large. Chris Nothing written herein should be interpreted as contradicting the statements of a qualified gunsmith, they are merely suggestions regarding clarification. I am not a qualified gunsmith nor do I claim to be such. One of the reasons SMLEs were effective was they were less prone to stoppages, one of the reasons they were less prone to stoppages (cf Ross Rifles) was that the chambers were of generous dimensions (allowing for variations in wartime cartridge production and for minor grit and foreign matter in the chamber under combat conditions) If you do have headspace issues (possible) it would probably be cheaper to look for another SMLE than correct them (unless you cna find a bolt head that mics sufficiently) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 9 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 9 April , 2011 Sorry about all that. Looks like Pete's advice is to be taken as well as being able to shoot my rifle. It appears from more reading that Lee Enfield bolts commonly allow for head space to accommodate the varying war time production rounds for their rim thickness and battlefield conditions. Armorers were even instructed to sand down bolts if they couldn't close using a .064 gauge. It is also given fright to American shooters as typical American and European bolt actions seal completely shut with little to no head space. Mine does not visibly present a problem and the working of the bolt is solid. The gunsmith also cautioned me that case splitting may occur. He was not overtly warning me of impending danger and that to fire it to see if it might pose a problem is optional. I Don't believe he knew the head space situation concerning Lee Enfields. In most cases, old ammo has a higher risk of this. In any case, SMLE breeches allow for the exhaust of gas to occur normally even in the case of a split shell. I will proceed and post results. Here's the link that I referenced on the issue. Please let me know if I'm talking rubbish.... My link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 9 April , 2011 Share Posted 9 April , 2011 Sorry about all that. Looks like Pete's advice is to be taken as well as being able to shoot my rifle. It appears from more reading that Lee Enfield bolts commonly allow for head space to accommodate the varying war time production rounds for their rim thickness and battlefield conditions. Armorers were even instructed to sand down bolts if they couldn't close using a .064 gauge. It is also given fright to American shooters as typical American and European bolt actions seal completely shut with little to no head space. Mine does not visibly present a problem and the working of the bolt is solid. The gunsmith also cautioned me that case splitting may occur. He was not overtly warning me of impending danger and that to fire it to see if it might pose a problem is optional. I Don't believe he knew the head space situation concerning Lee Enfields. In most cases, old ammo has a higher risk of this. In any case, SMLE breeches allow for the exhaust of gas to occur normally even in the case of a split shell. I will proceed and post results. Here's the link that I referenced on the issue. Please let me know if I'm talking rubbish.... My link You are not talking rubbish Alex, but I think you misunderstand exactly what headspace means. It is NOT the distance between the face of the bolt and the rear of the cartridge. The following is some info I posted on another thread. Several essays could be written on headspacing alone, but in simple terms it is the distance between the face of the bolt and the point at which the cartidge seats or positions in the chamber. In the case if a rimmed round like the .303 inch, where the front of the rim seats against the rear face of the chamber, the headspace is the distance from bolt to that rear face. However, in the case of a rimless round like the .50 Browning (or German 7.92mm) the round seats on the shoulder of the case at the forward end of the chamber and therefore the headspace is the distance from the bolt face to the chamber shoulder. Just to complete the picture, for a belted case like the .55 Boys which seats on the forward face of the belt, the headspace is from bolt face to that part of the chamber. ("Belt" in this sense has nothing to do with machine gun belts!) Simple isn't it? As you can see, your statement about American and European rifles having little or no headspace is incorrect, although I appreciate what you were trying to say. In the case of the .303 inch, the spec. for the thickness of the cartridge rim is Low .058, High .064 inches which is why the bolt must close on a .064 gauge to ensure it will work with ammunition of maximum rim thickness. Can I also concur with Chris's advice and caveats. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 9 April , 2011 Author Share Posted 9 April , 2011 Chris & Tony, I do not hold anyone's advice in confidence over a gunsmith's and I do not hold anyone responsible for actions I take with my rifle. I consider advice given here to be what it is..opinion...albeit rather specialist opinion. With that said, I can see where my error in explanation/understanding was regarding the difference in head-space for rimmed and rimless rounds. I'm going to fire the rifle anyway as the gunsmith only cautioned that in the worst case scenario, splitting cases may occur. If that happens, I'll stop and look for a new bolt-head. It seems however that this problem most frequently occurs when using reloaded ammo. If my South Africa mil surp rounds are splitting, my head space is probably to excessive. My earlier question was what other forum member's bolt heads measured so I know not only if mine may be on the small side and if it is what size I need to look for (I realize as a battle rifle strict standardization is hard to come by). Lengthwise, my bolt head measures on the the gauge to read .631 inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 9 April , 2011 Share Posted 9 April , 2011 The measurement of an individual bolt head is only relevent to that particular rifle, as the distance to the rear locking face on the receiver will determine the position of the bolt and thus the headspace.. This is not a statement of fact or recommendation, but I shot my first Lee-Enfield as a cadet in 1959 and have been shooting them to this day and I have never found one where the headspace was a matter of concern. Over the years I must have fired at least a hundred different rifles, either my own or those of friends and headspace has never been an issue. That is not to say that an incorrectly headspaced rifle will not cause problems with stretched or at worst, seperated cases, but I have not known it to be a problem. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete1052 Posted 9 April , 2011 Share Posted 9 April , 2011 Alex, when split cases happen it's often because of older surplus ammo left over from a long time ago. It you're the least bit concerned about your personal safety when firing the rifle you could put the rifle on a bench or table pointed downrange and then put sandbags on it to weigh it down and immobilize it. Something like a nail or nailed-down board should be on the top of the bench or table for the buttplate of the rifle to rest against. Then use a 10-foot length of string or cord to fire the rifle while it's pointed in a safe direction. Crude and non-technical though that test may be, if it doesn't blow up when fired you're probably good to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 10 April , 2011 Share Posted 10 April , 2011 My experience has been very similar to TonyE's (although over a far shorter span of time ) I have only one rifle that had headspace issues out of a lot, it is an old example in poor shape and with a dubious history, so I have not and will not fired it, it holds a place in my collection until I can find a better example or the sub-type. I also agree with Pete that older brass (or reloaded rounds) may crack. I have had this happen very, very rarely (with one batch of older POF (Pakistani) ammunition although 15 years ago I fired hundreds and hundreds of POF rounds and, despite the bad rap this ammunition gets for hang-fires and degraded primers, I had almost none and at $6.00 for a box of 32rounds I didn't think I could go far wrong). I have never had a separation with any brand of ammunition in any SMLE. With any newly acquired rifle after a full and close inspection I always fire a couple of rounds remotely and check for any problems. These weapons are the best part of 100 years old and this is literally a matter of life and death so I am always as careful as I can possibly be, I would urge you to adopt the same approach. As you say, the generous chamber of SMLEs causes more concerns and issues for people reloading and some reloaders save the brasses from particular rifles and reload it for that rifle only. I do not reload, but I know from reloaders that some brands of modern commercial brass are considerably thinner than earlier military brass and therefore they avoid them for reloading because of concerns over cracking etc even in rifles within specifications. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heatseeker Posted 3 August , 2011 Share Posted 3 August , 2011 @ S>S Is that an Enfield marking? The pics. Made by Wilkinson... Does the GR under the crown represent George V? George's reign began in '10 so its interesting that the stamp is on a 1908 piece unless that year is marked incorrectly. I'd say that what you have there is a really dodgy miss-strike and I reckon that bayonet was made in 1918 and issued to the Aussies, where it stayed, as evidenced by the "Australia" stamped in to the grip which was a US requirement for importation. You will also note a "D Arrow" on the pommel, which was the Aussie ownership mark until the World War II era "D^D". Regards your rifle, it looks like an essentially intact 1917 which has been to India. Many rifles were scrubbed of all marked and completely rebuilt, but quite a few only got minimal "touch ups". It looks like the stock has been lacquered, which could also be an Indian thing, or possibly something done in civilian ownership. Here's my non FTR'd EFD 1914 Pattern 1907 bayonet. Note that the "EFD" is much lower on the ricasso than your "Wilkinson", which probably necessitated the "agricultural" stamping of the date. The bluing on this 1914 bayonet is also finer and deeper than bayonets of the late 1918 era and it doesn't have a clearance hole in the pommel ... they obviously took a bit more care in gentler days: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbox Posted 3 August , 2011 Share Posted 3 August , 2011 I might just upload a small video showing my assembly to see if I'm threading the internal catch at the right point. As it appears, it seems as if the spring is not applying enough pressure to the locking bolt (thumb piece) despite having the safety screw securely fastened. It just seems so strange that it was working perfectly only 48 hours ago. I shall keep tinkering with the threading to make sure I've got it at the right point. Thanks Pete for the link, BRILLIANT! I shall be needing that in any event. Alex, apologies for picking up this thread so late. Enfield safety catches have about six start positions on the screw thread that join the safety level to the safety catch. Four of these positions give a safety assembly that will not work, just one position gives a nice crisp safety action - but one position gives a safety with a "floppy" action. You need to screw the two halves together so that they are at 11 o'clock to each other when fully screwed up. If the two halves are at "quarter to twelve", then you have the wrong position: In this photo, the left safety is wrong ("floppy"), the right is correct ("crisp"): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawdoc34 Posted 3 August , 2011 Share Posted 3 August , 2011 Another SAF nosecap on an Indian wire wrapped No1 Mk3* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex falbo Posted 13 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 13 August , 2011 Thanks for the reply Thunderbox. A perfect illustration. Heatseeker: The only part on my rifle marked FR is the forward band which interestingly looks to be a replacement since its missing its bluing. The barrel has after market ENGLAND stamped on it and I'm pretty sure the lacquer is a civie job. I'm most pleased and proud that my first acquisition was war production model with original pieces down to even the wood. That's a great looking bayonet. Nice prewar example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now